Emm, I get the comparison a little bit. I always call Mark and Tom the Lennon-McCartney of pop punk. Also with Mark seemingly having a preference for melody, harmony, down to earth lyrics and Tom being more experimental and as time progressed more spiritual and idealistic in his songwriting. But there's also a lot of difference. Obviously the biggest one being that The Beatles were a four-piece, with an extra songwriter in George Harrison (don't forget him!) and blink is a powertrio whos sound is carried for a large part by the pure technical ability of the man sitting behind the kit. Mark and Tom would have never reached those heights without Travis. As much as I love Ringo, I can't say the same for him.
Also if you want to compare the break-up, you can see some similarities except obviously Blink continued without Tom, whilst The Beatles never considered continuing without any of its four members.
Broccoli_Apocalypse wrote:When it comes to similarities, the only thing I see ... were the lead singers
And that they have a similar songwriting dynamic of one being the stable one who wants to play the same music and the other being the inconsistent avant-garde.
Paul McCartney wanted to play the same music?? That's bullshit. Throughout his career he's always pushed for radical new ways of songwriting, I'd say even more than John did in his time as a Beatle. Paul was the one that introduced those obsure classical instruments and that style of music to the sound of The Beatles, he was the one that thought of the idea of writing the first ever pop concept album and through his amazing melodies he invented so many new ways of songwriting within the world of rock and pop music (Helter Skelter to name an example, being the beginning of metal or Yesterday, which became a jazz standard or Eleanor Rigby, with that revolutionary classical string sound).